delete_kb

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It does disclose the key behavior: deletion requires a two-phase preview-and-confirm token flow. However, it omits consequences of an invalid token, irreversibility, permissions, or whether the first call actually deletes anything.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is one short sentence with no filler and is front-loaded with the key operation. The ambiguous closing phrase 'else full deletion' slightly detracts from an otherwise efficient structure.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description captures the essential two-phase workflow but leaves operational details unclear, such as the exact flow between preview and confirmation and the meaning of 'full deletion.' The presence of an output schema helps, but for a destructive tool with no annotations, more explicit guidance would be valuable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It partially does by explaining confirm_token as the confirmation mechanism, but it does not explain what kb should contain or how the token is obtained. The meaning is mostly inferred from the tool name and context.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the operation as knowledge base deletion and names the two-phase workflow. The trailing 'else full deletion' is ambiguous about when preview vs. full deletion occurs, but the core purpose is still understandable and distinct from sibling document tools.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies a two-step usage pattern: first preview, then confirm with a token. It does not explicitly state when to use this tool over remove_document or how the phases should be sequenced, leaving some inference to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.